looking at getting an M&P shield in .40 for everyday carry. are ported generally worth the extra money? im here for the sissy jokes too.

Just makes them louder on your end.

I love my shield .40 so much i got a shield 2.0 to upgrade. I didn't get the pc version because i didn't want the ported barrel. Muzzle rise and recoil aren't noticeable to me and in a self defense no ear pro situation it's gonna be loud enough without the ports. Mine loves heavier (180gr) ammo. I stock up on the s&b 180 jhp when it goes on sale

Gunny456 said:

---

Just makes them louder on your end.

---

This. I have a Browning .25-06 in Boss (all the rage in 1990), and I love the caliber but hate the noise. The Boss is/was a pretty good idea to match barrel to ammo but the extra loudness is no longer worth it to me.

You can still find new old stock of the non ported boss CR. Some people will also cut the ported section off a regular boss.

I have done both the ported handgun thing and the comp'd handgun thing for carry and competition.

To get the fuddlore out of the way: no, you dont lose significant velocity with a ported handgun. No, it won't blind you if you have to use it at night.

The recoil impulse is noticeably better.

Ports and comps are slightly louder, but its not by a lot. Most stuff I can find says 2-5 dB louder with a ported barrel. You're not going from no hearing damage without one to definite hearing damage by adding a port, but you are exposing your ears to a slightly higher dose of damage, which is worth considering.

IMO its a preference thing. There are some benefits but they aren't huge, and the drawbacks are usually overstated so its really nitpicky either direction.

On something like a Shield in .40, the benefits are probably larger than it would be with a ported full size gun, because small carry guns in .40 are usually "flippy".

That was a whole lot of words to say "it doesnt really matter, either way is fine", wasnt it?

good to hear. im not small or feeble by any means, just never shot a large caliber in such a small weapon. the PC version is about $200 extra which is a tough sell for me.

Well it's less than $100 difference once you replace your sights...

Bender. Always enjoy your knowledge and post. As I have posted in the past I have very poor ears and formed a great relationship with my Otologist/Neurologist who is an avid shooter and done lots of research on shooting sports/ear damage.
I would just add that Decibels are logarithmic and increase exponentially. The intensity of sound doubles every 3 decibels. So the 2-5 decibels you quoted would make the perceived intensity of the sound of the ported barrels more than double…..

CS78 said:

---

You can still find new old stock of the non ported boss CR. Some people will also cut the ported section off a regular boss.

---

Thanks CS78...... something to think about...... (modify that rifle or just keep wearing hearing protectors?)

I was hesitant to post even those numbers because I dont have a meter and havent tried to measure myself, so im quoting other peoples work and trusting it.

All I can really say on the matter is that even if the damage potential is doubled, the perceived additional noise/blast from ported guns is minimal compared to a regular handgun.

From a shooting perspective it is not significantly worse, but I have no doubt the potential for hearing damage is higher, I just don't know actual quantitative numbers.

Just another trade off to consider.

Eta: ported/comped rifles are a whole 'nuther beast. If people base how they expect ported handguns to sound based on experience with ported rifles, the difference in report with handguns is much less severe than it is with a rifle. I'm sure most of us have experienced shooting at an indoor range or under a metal roof next to a dude with a short rifle with a brake or a ported magnum rifle. Not fun! But handguns arent nearly as rough.

First, I wouldn't make any "sissy jokes" about anyone contemplating a .40 on such a small platform! Imo, that's a pretty snappy recoil, even for a full size pistol. I'd get the ported version. Chances are 99% of the time you're shooting it you'll have ear pro. So I wouldn't worry too much about extra noise. I would want to take steps to tame the snappiness of the recoil.

Agree. Thanks.
The Doc. Commented to me that the true accurate measurement of gunfire decibels is extremely difficult to do with consistent accuracy. He said most published Decibels of various cartridges and rifle/shotgun/handguns is really not really reliable. He has some of the most sophisticated equipment around for measuring sound and says it is still somewhat a WAG on instant short duration sounds like gunfire.
I did like it one day in our discussion when he told me to always make sure to shoot with your mouth closed!
…as lots of DBs can travel in the oral cavity directly to our ears.
I had to really work at doing that.

I have a Sig226 in a .40 and it has a conversion barrel and mag to make it 9mm. I have shot it both ways and feel little difference in recoil and sound.

Never get a loudener on any of your guns. Ported....muzzle brake.....whatever....avoid.

A loudener. I like that name for em.

Look at how a linear compensator works. While it doesn't make a gun "quieter", it directs the sound AWAY from you, which makes a gun seem quieter. Think about a megaphone 5 feet away from you. Does it "seem" louder when it's directed AT your ear, or AWAY from it??

That's the problem with a ported barrel. Some of that "blast" comes back to the shooter. It's not "louder", but it SEEMS louder.

Also, there is the problem with additional muzzle flash, if you're shooting in low-light conditions.

For a target/competition gun, get you a ported version. For defense use?? Don't do it.

Patented....gotta site sources to use
I guided a lil bitty 9 yr old girl shooting full load 300 wm with 200gr loads. She was deadly.

Think about that when you manbun wet wipes need a muzzlebreak on your creedmore.

fburgtx said:

---

For a target/competition gun, get you a ported version. For defense use?? Don't do it.

---

yea thats another dilemma. trying to increase accuracy by decreasing recoil, but making an already tense situation even more disorienting in the process. probly not something that can be resolved without a field test, but i cant argue with peeps that are convincing me to save money.

fburgtx said:

---

Also, there is the problem with additional muzzle flash, if you're shooting in low-light conditions.

---

Most defensive pistol ammo uses flash suppressing additives in their powder loads to mitigate flash issues in low light.

Having said that, I too was told the old "it'll blind you at night" lore.

So I used this pistol at a low light class.



Even with range ammo, the flash did not blind me, did not keep me from finding the dot for follow up shots…was a complete non issue.

I even used that same comp'd pistol at a night time run and gun under night vision. No issues.

That particular piece of gun store wisdom persists only because most people dont shoot ported or comp's handguns, and those who do likey dont shoot classes or competition at night. Doing both showed me that it was just another piece of untested "sounds right so it must be right" wisdom that gets doled out at gun store counters.

The flash causing issues in low light lore just didn't prove a factor in my experience.

Serious Lee said:

---

fburgtx said:

---

For a target/competition gun, get you a ported version. For defense use?? Don't do it.

---

yea thats another dilemma. trying to increase accuracy by decreasing recoil, but making an already tense situation even more disorienting in the process. probly not something that can be resolved without a field test, but i cant argue with peeps that are convincing me to save money.

---

"Gizmos" wont help. Dry fire, classes, competition and putting the effort into training is what will make you faster and more accurate, even under stress.

Give me the fanciest, most tricked out guitar in the world and give Willie Nelson a $100 pawn shop 6 string. Who do you think is going to sound better?

I have been mulling over the P365 Macro X Comp

BenderRodriguez said:

---

Serious Lee said:

---

fburgtx said:

---

For a target/competition gun, get you a ported version. For defense use?? Don't do it.

---

yea thats another dilemma. trying to increase accuracy by decreasing recoil, but making an already tense situation even more disorienting in the process. probly not something that can be resolved without a field test, but i cant argue with peeps that are convincing me to save money.

---

"Gizmos" wont help. Dry fire, classes, competition and putting the effort into training is what will make you faster and more accurate, even under stress.

Give me the fanciest, most tricked out guitar in the world and give Willie Nelson a $100 pawn shop 6 string. Who do you think is going to sound better?

---

This is the best advice that's been given.

BenderRodriguez said:

---

"Gizmos" wont help. Dry fire, classes, competition and putting the effort into training is what will make you faster and more accurate, even under stress.

---

This x1000. I'll add that a few matches, shooting in a dynamic environment on the clock, taught me 10x more than 100 trips to the range shooting at paper.

I'm gonna offer some advice that might be controversial, but I would just avoid the .40 altogether and get the pistol in 9mm instead. And actually, not even because of the reduction in muzzle flip. With the advancements in today's bullet technology, .40 offers no statistically significant advantage over 9mm… in addition to the ammo being less available, more expensive, and you have less mag capacity. Test after test has shown that there is no appreciable difference in temporary and permanent wound channel size and penetration depth between .45, .40, and a good 9mm load, nor has there been any significant difference in effectiveness between these 3 rounds in actual shooting scenarios provided proper bullets are used and not ball ammo. What the .40 and .45 offer in greater bullet diameter, 9mm makes up for in higher velocity, faster follow-up, and greater mag capacity.

The infamous 1986 FBI "Miami shootout" that gave rise to the "9mm is inadequate" myth and lead to development of the 10mm and .40 was due to the FBI using 115gr Win STHP and the perp being high. Both the FBI and the military have subsequently transitioned back to 9mm once they realized that .40 and .45 offered them no advantage and only disadvantages. None of the common semiauto defensive rounds are all that great due to pistols not offering sufficient velocity to cause massive tissue disruption. SA pistol rounds in short barrels kinda suck period. All of them, equally. Pistol "stopping power" is a myth. Sometimes myths die hard, and this is one of them.

So, if you know up front that all of the common SA defensive pistol rounds kinda suck equally, why not pick the one with less muzzle flip, that's easier on the life of the gun, and gives you greater mag capacity? Just pick from the best bullets available and practice a lot. 9mm also offers you less cost to practice a lot.

Gunny456 said:

---

I would just add that Decibels are logarithmic and increase exponentially.

this is true

The intensity of sound doubles every 3 decibels.

this part is mistaken/misstated. The POWER needed to create a 3dB increase is double. That's at the sound generating end. Intensity" refers to the receiving end.

So the 2-5 decibels you quoted would make the perceived intensity of the sound of the ported barrels more than double….. let's stick with 3dB. 3dB, to a listener is merely a "perceptible increase", even though it requires twice the power behind it. To double the perceived sound intensity, you need 10x the power, which is a 10dB increase.

---

It's easiest to think of a stereo system. For a given setup (i.e speaker wires, speakers, room) you need to double the wattage the amp is putting out (e.g. 10w to 20w) for a perceivable (3db) increase in volume. To double the perceived volume (i.e. 10dB increase) you need to go from the original 10w to 100w. So, a 2-5dB increase could feel to your ears somewhere between just barely noticeable to noticeable, but it would not feel like a doubling.

I've been a stereo geek/audiophile for a long time and the decibel scale is confusing. Just trying to share some knowledge. Gunny certainly gets the gist, just had some of the math slightly misunderstood, hope this didn't sound like a gotcha or anything, just providing a minor clarification.

Understand I'm just stating what my Doc. has researched and written in his research on gunfire induced hearing loss….. I have just regurgitated it.
Some good references you might want to read that explains it a hell of a lot better than my limited knowledge can be found at www.CDC. Gov. Looking at hearing loss/ protection. And www.saintlukeskc.org and ref hearing loss research. Where the Doc has some writings and info.
I'm not calling you out either. Im sure in the audiophile/realm your info applies….the key factor is how great the sound loudness increases in the high end (85 DCB's or greater logarithmickly) Small DB changes on the upper end of the scale are very dramatic in perceived loudness.
I worked for a high end stereo/audio company and get your knowledge and expertise on the matter.. would love to learn more.

Thaddeus Beauregard said:

---

I'transitioned back to 9mm once they realized that .40 and .45 offered them no advantage .

---

Wish nw80 were here to offer his professional opinion on that

Definitely agree that 9mm is a better choice than .40. Honestly, .40 seems to be a dying caliber.